I am chill. :) No need for either of us to read spite into the others comments. Text is bad at communicating tone :)

I guess my comment was meant more in general, not at you specifically (though I understand it being in a reply of course feels that way)

I am sorry my comment came of as hostile or combative

Oh absolutely, I was mainly targeting the notion that the way “legit” companies distribute the profits is somehow more fair.

If anything these markets show what the actual cost of production is, so it shows how much profit could have been distributed to those actually producing the goods. (Including designers, factory workers etc)

A lot more people could have sustainable incomes instead of CEOs getting their third yacht…

Look, it’s a funny and ironic turn of events and my comment mainly tried to expand upon why this evokes this emotional response from some people.

Also, I don’t think most Americans identify with the shady practices of corporations either, so equating a undoubtedly shady history on copyright with the stance of all Chinese people everywhere is a bit… 🤔

As others have mentioned it’s also not accidental that the outrage is at the Nintendo store specifically. There is a lot of bad blood between the Chinese and the Japanese.

Yea, better word indeed :)

Yes, because that is where all the profit goes in Western companies, and not the CEO, upper management and stockholders…

You are not wrong in assuming that exploited labor is being under compensated, but different models of labor exploitation aside, people actually making value are not the people reaping the benefits.

As if random internet outrage ever cared about getting the fundamental details correct, when there is rage to be had.

I think the cultural theme of the game is more reason for the “anger” than the gameplay formula.

Its based on the most famous Chinese mythological story / fairytale about the Monkey King Wukong.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_King

I have not deep dived into it, but I think it’s a treasured and well known story in China, and I assume a lot of Chinese people are proud of their mythology being a successful story outside of China as well.

This is also due to the size of traffic these days.

Originaly (if we say, take early html as a starting point) it was mostly text, then later a few images.

These days a simple webpage needs large amounts of code and data just to load. So packets having to get to you in a roundabout way doesn’t just make the page take a little longer to load, it will most likely break the page.

But the infrastructure and ways of communication is really hard to take down and except for the few nations that have complete control over their own network, it is nearly impossible to break down communication completely. You would just need to rely on simpler data structures.

As others have stated fewer isp’s and core infrastructure providers do make the global network a bit more vulnerable today. And sites and services that lots of people consider “the internet” can be (at least for a while) taken down/offline.

I was actually prepared for the Forbes article to be the type of article it criticizes. I’d say the title is under selling the article, and I bet the downvotes are making the same assumption I was.

I also think the title of article is intentionally made to target the people that actually needs to read the Forbes being critical of yet a nother idiotic attempt by other media outlets to villify gaming.

I think the main reason is that StarCraft sprites were based on 3d models so either they can be made higher definition by working from the original assets or they simply upscale better.

Wc1 and 2 mainly uses hand drawn pixel art sprites, and it looks like they have gone with the “crude upscale + retouch” approach. Makes them look like the super scale filters lots of people used on emulators back in the day.

Honestly I think original art and a solid crt filter is the way to go with old Pixel classics. But i know this is a divisive position.

No obviously the forces of Ukraine would be scared once he rode in on his unicorn.

Virtual environments are really not viable for music production. Latency and other inconsistensies makes it a no-go.

High level Music production requires very low audio and input latency in addition to consistent and 100% accurate sound reproduction.

A virtual environment is a wildcard here that I at least would not bother trying to make work. (Not saying it can’t be done, just saying it would potentially be a big headache and extremely conditioned on spesific hardware, drivers and configuration settings.)

I mean. This is probably just to cover their own asses. Since they are more likely to be held accountable or something that can be downloaded through their platform then a random mod of the internet.

A few of us still remembers option 3) Regulation And also 4) Properly working anti-trust laws.

Important to look as good as possible on the end of the year report…

It’s not the guy in the trenchcoat next to you you need to worry about.

It’s the fact that some unknown entity owns/has set up the WiFi.

Anyone working with complex network setup and admin will tell you how much you can abuse owning the network a user is connected to.

The network guys at work never use public WiFi, not hotels or anything. Neither do I, even with my much more limited knowledge of network administration.

Well they do… But only barely and less so in the US lately.

There are still cases of small artists getting compensation for big business using their images or music without consent. But sadly it is far from the norm.

I agree with your core sentiment. Copyright is not working how it was intended and it is being abused by corporations.

It might be because I’m not American, or because I am a musician and songwriter myself. but I still see a point to having some laws protecting the rights of the creative mind behind something.

Removing copyright completely will only make it even more easy for the guys with the money and resources to exploit the small independent creators.

But (American) copyright is severely broken. This is true.

A starting point would be that the right is only tied to the specific creative(s) actually involved in the creation of something.

The thing is its only the copyrights of individual artists and creators that will die to this.

The big corpos will find a way to protect their value, just you wait.

They will steal from every single creative in the world and then sue them to hell and back if they use anything they them selves “own”

This is not a threat to the copyrights that you want to die.

Didn’t know where in the tread to reply.

This is being worked on from multiple angles.

In the us apple, Google, Microsoft ++ are working on a common framework for this. (Shocking who are working on this in the us)

The EU has a citizens digital wallet program for the same purpose. These programs are also collaborating so that certificates and proof of personhood/citizenship etc can be exchanged between various actors.

The EU model leans heavily into privacy and user control of data, where you as an individual decides with whom to share your credentials, proof of personhood, etc.

This would lead to many possibilities, like for instance being able to confirm digitally prescriptions for medicine across borders, so you can easily get your medication even if you are traveling in another country, without having to spend time and energy getting signed paperwork send back and forth.

The most simple form of this would be that the system simply verifies that yes, you are indeed a human individual. But can be expanded to confirm citizenship, allow you to share your medical data with institutions, confirm diplomas and professional certification etc.

Breach of trademark, not copyright, whole different barrel of fish.